2013 USD Toreros

made the CIT at 16-16 (7-11 WCC)… as did Pacific at 15-15 (6-12). Last year Portland made it at 17-15 (7-11). Pepp made the slightly better CBI at 18-13 (10-8)…

At least we’ll have a winning record, overall and in the WCC. Given that data, I would suppose we have a chance for one of those? I didn’t love KK and the CIT, but Herb is still putting his system in, and JB can score some points. We can beat a lot of the other CIT teams, in my opinion, with KJ.

I’ll assume you mean the bogus postseason, not the actual (which I consider to be both the NCAA and NIT)

I understand that many of the participants don’t go on to great success the following year, but some do- last year, Nevada won the CBI (first year with a new coach), this year they won the Mountain West (at 25-6 overall). In 2010 VCU won the CBI, then went to the Final Four. The following year, Oregon won to start their run of success. It isn’t universally a good idea, but I think it is most valuable for a coach new to a school looking for extra practices with a set of younger players. We partially do and partially don’t fit that mold. We also are simply short on players. I don’t expect we’ll do it, but if we do not, it appears that will be because we choose not to do it.

I think it makes sense for us. As GetNashty pointed out, teams who have participated in these pay to play tournaments with first year coaches tend to benefit from the extra time with the team and come back stronger next year. I don’t think we aren’t going to be stronger next year since we’re losing Brownridge but it will still help us more than it could hurt us. Since we do have to pay to play in either the CIT or CBI it would also give me some confidence that the school really does care about investing in basketball now.

Also, I’d like to see JB get the 11 points needed to pass Tyler Haws on the all time leading scorer’s list (putting him right behind Kevin Foster)

Can’t see the value of a pay-to-play tourney this year. Maybe if you could focus the game plan toward the younger players, but by not involving JB and Kratch, you are looking at a one and done scenario, so what was the point?

Is it really that beneficial though? Keeping in mind all of the injuries they’ve had. Are you saying you will pay to play those that have not been playing already? You’re going to pay to play Wardlow, Akil, Tony and those others on the bench?

Your good players have already logged plenty of minutes this year… And to do it just for JB to get 11 pts…. Did he not have plenty of chances to get those during the season? that’s not to take away anything from his play, but… It is what it is.

I’d love to see them play more, but at the cost…. just not sure it is worth it. JMO

Some googling brings up 35,000 for the first round and 50,000 for the quarterfinals plus the cost of opening up the arena. Would 100 K be better spent in recruiting vs more practices? I honestly don’t know. If they used it as a chance to get the younger kids going (Douglas, Feagin, Pugh, Healy, Hauser, and I would say Roche but I assume redshirt still applies even for this nonsense)

At the margins, does 10-15 extra practices make them better? I honestly don’t know. Does 100K allow the coaching staff to fly around the country and get better players? Maybe. Does SCU just bank that? Also possible. If Sendek wants more time with them, I think they should do it. Otherwise, no.

You’ve got the correct answer- If Sendek thinks it helps for next season in a way commensurate with the cost and burden on the school, do it.

If he thinks that the wear and tear, the cost, and the upcoming turnover make it a waste, skip it.

The idea was that the admin was going to treat the program like a major program. I would think that means giving the option, and shouldering the cost, of a tournament like this. We shall see what happens.

What has been grinding my gears is that fully healthy version of this team should have won -> UC Davis, SJSU, Tenn State, Wazzu, UC Irvine, @LMU, maybe @USF. Flip those to wins and we’re 24-9, 12-6 in the WCC, which would probably be an NIT bid. Sendek won’t let this team lose those NC games going forward, with his guys and a full off-season.

I understand the angst re: some of the losses (you forgot USD), particularly NC. We’ll never know how things would have turned out w/ both Feagin and Pugh healthy at the same time. I believe they only played about 5 games together and a few of those were right after Feagin returned and I suspect Pugh was trying to play through some injuries at that time.
That said, the overall talent level is still not substantially better than a team like WSU or even USF, so while it is possible we win all those games listed if we’re 100% healthy, it is still likely we lose a couple. Look at it in terms of probability of winning each game (KenPom and others publish such predictions), without looking it up we’re probably somewhere in the 50% (WSU) to 70% range of winning those games, if you play 8-12 games like that you’re still likely to lose 1 to 3 of them….compared to say GU who would have probably had a 90+% win prediction in every game against that same set of teams and thus is more likely and realistic for them to run the table.
Also, our significant reliance on the 3 pointers which is probably the least consistent and reliable aspect of the game, while being just so-so in other areas of the game make it more likely we lose on an off shooting night even if we’re playing w/ good effort and are more talented than the opposing team.
I think 21 to 22 wins was in reach, 24+ is/was a stretch regardless of injuries, playing effort, etc.

Whether or not they do a pay for play tournament, does anyone know if they can they still practice per NCAA rules? Does your ability to practice end once you are “done,” or can you practice up until the NCAA championship game?